Intersections in colonial and penal politics Intersections in colonial and penal politics The case of Queensland in the 1870s Kerry Wimshurst In 1870 female prisoners from Brisbane were relocated to Toowoomba, principal town on the Darling Downs. The move angered townspeople who suspected that political reprisal was the motive for imposing the ‘terrible women’ on them. In fact, the relocation was primarily an attempt to solve longstanding problems related to prison labour, and especially the control of male labour. The movement of prisoners provides a penological perspective on social and economic conflicts that were played out at regional and metropolitan levels. There has been little written about penal politics in Australia in the second half of the nineteenth century. This article explores the political intersections that determined the evolution of one penal regime, but the issues are of perennial significance to the field of penal studies. The study points to the importance of investigating public reaction to prison policy and exploring political, economic and social particularities in correctional history. This article has been peer-reviewed. Mr POWER: He believed if the Government attempted to carry out such a scheme, it would lead to the colony becoming a republic. If they imported such females, they ought to keep them in Brisbane. He believed there were as many good and virtuous people in Toowoomba as in any town in the colony, and the Government were not justified in the course they adopted of forcing such immoral characters upon them. Toowoomba Chronicle, 10 December 1870, 3. 135 History Australia | Volume 9 | Number 2 On the evening of 5 December 1870, a meeting was held in Toowoomba to protest against the action of the colonial government ‘in making Toowoomba a receiving house of the female outcasts of the metropolitan city’. The mayor noted his regret that the protest had not begun sooner, because already a few women prisoners consigned from the city had arrived at the local gaol.1 The townspeople’s hostility at first seems puzzling, because in the early 1860s they had welcomed the building of the gaol to house local men and women.2 In 1860 Toowoomba was one of the first assize towns established outside Brisbane to hear the cases of ‘all criminals committed by the various Benches throughout the whole of the immense southern and western districts’. Judge Lutwyche of the Supreme Court was instrumental in promoting plans for a gaol in the town. A gaol meant that prisoners from the region, while on remand and waiting for their cases to be heard, would not have to be escorted back and forth to Brisbane ‘at heavy outlay and considerable risk’. If housed locally, it was hoped, they might be employed on roads and public works. Lutwyche had condemned the moral turpitude of the young colony, and the building of a gaol signalled the uprightness of the town in the face of such criticisms.3 Although early reports pointed to defects in materials and design, there was little opposition in the early 1860s to the gaol itself.4 Completed in 1864, it symbolised for Toowoomba’s citizens the growing prosperity of their town, which with a population of about 4600 was seeking to establish itself as the major service centre for the pastoral and farming interests on the Darling Downs.5 The anger of the townspeople in 1870 was sparked because female prisoners were now to be forwarded ‘exclusively’ to their gaol, while local men would be sent to the capital. The townspeople had been taken by surprise. Only one month before the protest meeting the liberal-leaning member for Toowoomba, William Henry Groom, wrote to the Premier and Colonial Secretary Arthur Hunter Palmer, noting that ‘considerable feeling prevailed’ about the ‘alleged’ transfer of prisoners, and asking for clarification.6 The reply from the Colonial Secretary’s office was the 1 Darling Downs Gazette, 7 December 1870, 3; Toowoomba Chronicle, 10 December 1870, 3. 2 Toowoomba Chronicle, 26 September 1861, 2; Darling Downs Gazette, 16 June 1864, 3. 3 ‘The Black Assize’, Darling Downs Gazette, 21 July 1864, 2. 4 Toowoomba Chronicle, 26 September 1861, 2. 5 D B Waterson Squatter, Selector, and Storekeeper: A History of the Darling Downs 1859– 93, Sydney: Sydney University Press 1968; Maurice French Pubs, Ploughs & ‘Peculiar People’: Towns, Farms and Social Life, Toowoomba: University of Southern Queensland Press 1992. 6 Toowoomba Chronicle, 12 November 1870, 3. 136 Intersections in colonial and penal politics first public confirmation that the movement of prisoners would go ahead. Initially, it seemed that town concern was about the removal of local men. By the time of the protest meeting, however, attention had shifted to the character of the incoming women who would ‘necessarily resort to crimes of the most demoralising character to obtain a livelihood’, once released upon the town.7 Studies of the official punishment of women in the late nineteenth century have argued that their incarceration was concerned as much with the control of refractory women as the control of crime. Penal strategies for inculcating acceptable womanly behaviours and punishing criminality varied from place to place, but had common disciplinary objectives. For example, penal approaches to the rehabilitation of criminal women in the United Kingdom were based increasingly on therapeutic and medical models compatible with the emergence of the liberal welfare state. Such ‘progressive’ views placed less emphasis on traditional notions of the inherent evil of female offenders, but produced an increasing array of institutions for restraining and treating ‘deviant’ women.8 Similarly, reformatories in the United States of America, while intended for ‘saving’ young women, were also characterised by coercive practices premised on respectable views about normal and abnormal womanhood.9 In Australia penal strategies for governing deviance and criminality were also developing, to the apparent disadvantage of women compared with men. In New South Wales, John Ramsland has argued, ‘women were not as well cared for as men’ in gaols, and ‘degradation was worse for women than men’.10 Similarly, Peter Lynn and George Armstrong suggest that in Victoria ‘females were worse off as discharged prisoners, just as they were as prisoners’. There was no permanent accommodation for women until the late 1890s, and they were ‘frequently moved about in 7 Female prisoners convicted in Brisbane, and undergoing sentence in Toowoomba (Petition), Queensland, Votes and Proceedings of the Legislative Assembly (hereafter QVP), third session of 1870, 259. 8 Lucia Zedner Women, Crime and Custody in Victorian England, Oxford: Clarendon Press 1991; Russell P Dobash, R Emerson Dobash and Sue Gutteridge The Imprisonment of Women, Oxford: Basil Blackwell 1986. 9 Mara L Dodge Whores and Thieves of the Worst Kind: A Study of Women, Crime, and Punishment, DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press 2002; Estelle Freedman Their Sisters’ Keepers: Women’s Prison Reform in America, 1830–1930, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press 1981; Nicole Hahn Rafter Partial Justice: Women in State Prisons, 1800– 1935, Boston: Northeastern University Press 1985. 10 John Ramsland With Just But Relentless Discipline: A Social History of Corrective Services in New South Wales, Sydney: Kangaroo Press 1996, 90, 163. 137 History Australia | Volume 9 | Number 2 different types of accommodation’.11 The reasons for such neglect are not explored in depth in the histories of corrective services in these states, although it seems clear that women remained an afterthought in penal policy. The only major study in Queensland concludes that the control of wayward women was an important objective of women’s incarceration, but again it is not clear why women should have been removed from the metropolis, Brisbane, in 1870 to what contemporaries judged an inferior country gaol.12 This article argues that the gendered relationships produced by the emerging penal system were reciprocal relationships of control. That is, arrangements made for the control of male or female prisoners necessarily affected the other sex as well. The management of women thus depended on disciplinary and fiscal considerations relating to the control of male prisoners. This is not to deny that colonial Queensland developed criminal justice and public health systems aimed at the sexual control of marginalised women. For example, two years before the Toowoomba move the Contagious Diseases Act (1868) was introduced in Queensland, making it one of the few places in the world where such legislation applied across the colony and not just to locations with military personnel. A woman suspected of prostitution might be compelled by the police to submit to medical examination. Signs of venereal disease would lead to three months confinement in the lock hospital; non-compliance or absconding incurred a prison sentence. The legislation was aimed at controlling the growing number of prostitutes in Brisbane and regional ports.13 It is likely that the removal of ‘fallen women’ from the metropolis was supported by respectable urbanites aspiring to ‘civilised’ ways in the new self-governing (but economically struggling) colony, a colony that had emerged from a convict past barely a generation earlier.14 Control of non-conforming and criminal women was certainly a concern for colonial authorities, but the primary impetus for rearranging 11 Peter Lynn and George Armstrong From Pentonville to Pentridge: A History of Prisons in